BillsfaninFl

You guys have this all wrong. What really happened is this: Goddell didn't want Vick to come to Buffalo because he is from western New York and didn't want to corrupt the morals of this fine commmunity. Michael Vick wanted to come to Buffalo at first. But he didn't think that a truckload of dog food was a big enough signing bonus. Wilson was against signing Vick because he wasn't over the hill yet, and he didn't want to change Bills policy. The S.P.C.A, was for Vick coming to the area because Virginia's S.P.C.A. said he was an avid supporter. He took many of the large number of dogs they had for adoption. Brandon didn't try to sign him because when told he just came out of the "big house," he thought that meant Ohio State. We already had some recent defensive backs from there and he saw no reason to hire one to play a quarter of the way back. Dick Jauron wanted him, and if Vick signed he had plans to change his position to kick returner. Several fans hated him because his name reminded them of medicated cough drops. I asked around, and in spite of Michael's past, not a single canine was against him being reinstated or brought to Buffalo. O.J. was quoted as saying, "why would you want a dog killer in Buffalo?" Of course, now, Vick the lovable reformed citizen can throw out comments like that because he doesn't think anyone would be offended. Doesn't he realize that no one can top the Pittsburgh Steelers for offending people with stupid comments? Personally, I don't care if Jack the Ripper is signed. I just want to see players on the Bills squad that can help them win games. After the game, they can eat the opponents for all I care. I want more Ws.

Leave it alone. That's not what we meant by "K-Gun."

For the Bills, the definition of active is to see who is left after all the top players are gone. Nix has been spouting the Wilson party line since he was hired (because Wilson didn't really know a lot of the other available guys). Nix has no choice, so he points it out right away each season to lower our expectations. Don't blame Nix or Gailey when non-impressive season number twelve is over. They took the only job available for them to be in such a high position, and I believe they were privately told not to expect any spending sprees. So each has one hand tied behind their back. But we will be fed with the usual hype and spin, hype and spin. When the season starts, a lot of fans will be sucked in again. I'll wait to see the baby before I pass out cigars, and I don't care if some people say that doesn't make me a true fan. I've paid my dues for more than 50 years, so I have a right to say I'll believe it when I see it.

Except that the Bills don't draft as well as the Steelers. They will never be a top team if they do not also use free agency as more than a chance to grab other teams' castoffs. The times when they went after someone like James Lofton are long gone. And so are the drafts for guys like Bruce Smith, Jim Kelly, etc. How can you keep thinking they are doing anything different year after year?

Typical Bills shot in the dark. The guy has been injured for three straight years.

Revenue sharing is a moving target. If the latest version is more fair to small market teams, then it's good news. But as stated by some of us, there are differences in the accounting systems used by teams. And just like the tax laws, there are loopholes that always seem to favor the richest people. For example, the new stadiums that were built in recent years were not necessarily much larger. Instead, they had more luxury boxes because one of the loopholes in NFL revenue sharing was that the money gained from luxury boxes was not part of the amount to be shared. When Wilson changed their accounting policy to a "cash to the Cap" system, it meant that they were skewing the numbers so that it looked like they were spending more money annually than they actually were. Now people fooled by the (apparent) middle-of-the-pack Bills annual payroll (somewhere between 13th and 28th in the league, depending on which source you believe,) think that is proof that Ralph is not one of the cheapest owners in the league. I sure don't know all the details of the agreements, but some things have been well publicized and are accepted as fact. There certainly is strong evidence that spending the most does not necessarily result in winning the Super Bowl. And some teams have been very good for a long time without being among the top spenders. But the failure of the Bills has been a combination of not spending enough along with not spending it wisely. Running a successful team starts with hiring top football people to run the organization and coach the players. Breaking news: That has not been the case in Buffalo for more than a decade. Then these people who demand higher pay and more independence in doing their job, bring in the right players, develop the right game plans to maximize their available talent, are able to quickly adjust to what other teams are doing well, etc. Bottom Line: If the Bills are going to get a better share of the financial league pie that's good. If they are also going to be forced to spend closer to the salary cap, that's good, too. Now if the organization finally comes to the conclusion that hiring top football people and letting them do their thing is the way to go, this could be the start of something exciting. But if the team continues to be run by unqualified personnel (a castoff GM from Pittsburgh, a great coach who was just a rookie GM, a marketing guy GM no more qualified that several of us, a bunch of head coaches who were either new to the job or with a less than outstanding performance record, etc.) then the league financial policies are not enough to help the Bills be competitive.

Interesting comment. It got me thinking about what might be in Ralph's head. Here are some possibilities: 1. Well, maybe I'll be able to take a crap tomorrow. 2. I probably should stop making comments to the press. Everytime I do, I show them that I have no clue about how to run a football operation. 3. My legacy? All I care about is raking in more cash from those peasants in western New York, as long as possible. 4. Last night I had a dream that the Lions owners were willing to swap me even up for the Bills. I'd do it in a heartbeat. 5. They don't realize how hard it is to be a team owner. Last year I had to travel to Buffalo three times. 6. Why do they keep feeding me this mush? If only I could chew a steak. 7. Damn, I dribbled on my shirt again. 8. I don't understand why they criticized me for hiring old men as General Managers. Levy and Nix are only in their seventies. 9. Disgruntled fans are they? Wait until next year when my niece becomes Bills President. 10. I don't know what's worse: when it itches or when I can't feel it at all.

Perhaps you should start a thread about things and people you hate. It could be the hate zone. And you could bare all your repressed feelings to others, giving them insight into your personality. And it will be safe because none of them can touch you. I have just one question. Are you a teenager?

There's a difference between having an argument about the league, the Bills, football, players, owners, etc. and blasting each other with personal attacks. I'm far from being a passive guy, but I try to keep from going too far. If that's your style, so be it.

Guys and Gals, As I read our exchanges in these threads, I see the comments getting more caustic than conversational. I know it's hot outside, the NFL season is not a sure thing and the economy still sucks, but perhaps we should take a deep breath before continuing to bash each other in our posts. Lately, I've seen a lot of latent hatred being implied, with remarks about race, religion and political ideologies getting more frequent. We are all frustrated by the chance that there may be a delay before we get our football fix. But surely we can take it down a notch so that we can continue to enjoy reading and participating in the Stadium Wall. If anyone cares to contribute, this might be a thread where we can get away from the lashing out for a moment. What's a funny thing that happened to you at a Bills game? One of mine is... Several years ago a group of us took a bus trip to a Bills home game (from Pennsylvania). After the game we returned to our bus parked next to others. The Bills lost that game big time and there were a lot of somber faces everywhere. The people in the half-filled bus next to us had all sat in the front rows, except for a young lady who went to the rear, opened the roof hatch and climbed half out onto the roof. She removed her top and bra (she was very drunk). It cracked us up. As we started laughing, the people in front of the bus beside us thought we were fans of the other team and that we were mocking them. They started getting angry and made signs to show it, never realizing what the girl in their rear was doing. We could not hear each other, so they kept getting madder as we laughed all the more. Some of us were even pointing, but they didn't get it. As our bus pulled away, we couldn't help seeing the humor of the situation. Meanwhile, the people in the other bus were shaking their fists at us and looked like they were shouting. Sometimes, when you are in a bad mood, the least little thing will be humorous.

I won't be upset if Poz leaves, although I believe he is a good player. I won't be upset if any Bills player leaves, or if several of them leave. In baseball, the Bills would be considered a "farm" team. (One who develops players for others to use at the peak of their playing career.) I will be upset if the Bills leave Buffalo. Even though I have not lived in Buffalo for 26 years... the city, the people, the area are outstanding and deserve what they have... plus a lot more. It will be a tragedy if the Bills are taken away from Buffalo.

Help me out here. I don't understand why retired players or (potential) rookies have any say in this matter. The benefits for retired players that may be altered in a new CBA would only apply to those players who have not yet retired, or it would be an illegal "ex post facto" policy. My understanding is that once you are retired in the U.S., retirees have no right to legally force their former employer to give them more benefits. If that is not the case, I would be hiring a lawyer a.s.a.p. Drafted players are not yet employees and there is no guarantee that they will be signed by the team that chose them. That's why they have an agent who negotiates a contract for them and every year there are holdouts. Once a contract is signed, they are employees. But until then, they have no rights - and no responsibilities to the NFL or its teams. These "rookies" can seek employment elsewhere (Canadian League, USFL, etc.) and therefore have no claim to be made. Free agents might be a different situation.

So much for the statement that Judge Nelson will determine the fate of the NFL. Talk about pipe dreams.

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this morning (in a 54 page document, of course) that the NFL owners' lockout is legal and can continue until a new CBA is agreed upon. It gives more leverage to the owners in the negotiations, but if they are already coming together it matters little.

Whoever did the photo cleanup should be embarrassed.

You're right. All these discussions about the same things over and over show that there is really nothing to talk about. However, people (like myself) mindlessly return to the stadium wall or a variety of other domains to see if there is anything new going on. When the result is negative, we throw in posts that are repetitive again and again. Here are some different topics I suggest we address: How many Bills coaches have a drawl? Are the cheerleaders actually leading cheers? Why don't they sell chicken pot pies at the concession stands?

Actually, there is no error in the schedule. Mathews has inside info from a reliable source that after losing their first eight games, the Dolphins will move (during the night) to New York and become the Jets. They win the lawsuit to use that name, because the current New York Jets are actually the New Jersey Jets. Since the NFL condones teams naming themselves for a city or state that they are not really located at, perhaps we could rename our local team the Toronto Bills, but still play all our home games in Buffalo.

I didn't know there were any pubic schools in Buffalo. Huh? Public schools? Never mind.

He makes his living writing about major league sports and nothing is happening right now. So he has to write something to get a paycheck. Give him some slack.

Sorry, I got carried away.

You guys are really cruel. This poor guy probably held back his rant for several months, but then something happened that put him over the top. It could have been a hangnail, constipation or any other straw that broke the camel's back. Now play nice, so we can continue discussing the same few subjects ad nauseum while we wait for something to happen. Wait... Now that I think about it, given a choice of rehashing the same subjects over and over, or blasting each other, maybe we need to do more of this. Okay... Your mother wears army boots. Go ahead and fire back at me.

Well said, but you're wasting your time trying to use facts to convince Doc.

A funny line, but it brings up a sickening result: who wants to see a 90+ year old naked? I understand and agree with the poster's desire for a winning team now. But the only way it could really happen is if Wilson suddenly wanted a winner before he passes on and reverses his previous actions by raiding the free agent market big time (when it opens up). Sometimes this works to make a team instantly competitive. At other times it becomes the Snyder Syndrome, a debilitating disease. Regarding the chances of this spending spree happening, you have a better chance of winning the lottery.

Now I see the misunderstanding between us. "Lesser cities" refered to cities that may not be as lucrative for an NFL team as the majority of earlier choices, based on a combination of factors, including population, local support for the NFL from fans and corporations, etc. It did not compare these locations to Buffalo. The point being that the best football towns have been taken. Making it riskier for a new (or moved) team to be sure that it will succeed financially in what was available more recently. The relevance of Wilson's financial conservatism in his later years is that he has probably not seriously considered moving the team because it would be financially risky. This is not to say that his financial strategy has been right or wrong. Merely that his track record has shown that he has played it close to the vest for several years. The combination of these two points of factual evidence implies that it was not loyalty to a community that kept the Bills in Buffalo. You can believe the opposite if you wish, but since Wilson has directly or indirectly implied multiple times over the years that unless he gets the financial support of the fans and local government that he may have to consider moving the team, that's questionable. (Of course, he and his staff may have just been pressuring people to build a stadium and fill it, which has happened in many NFL towns, but that certainly doesn't sound like loyalty to Buffalo fans either.) In fact, I am unaware of any real evidence that he has this perceived loyalty. Perhaps you can provide some. Finally, if you need some evidence about the risk I mentioned, check out Jacksonville, an expansion city. Yes it's far greater than Buffalo if you are speaking of population, but it has failed as an NFL franchise. The fact that the stadium could not be filled for a majority of games over several years has been such an embarrassment that the owner had whole sections of seats permanently covered a few years ago so that the small crowds wouldn't be so obvious when games were televised. This financial inadequacy is why Jacksonville is a candidate to move to Los Angeles.

Which do you think will happen first? a) This thread will end with agreement by the members of The Stadium Wall. b) The NFL CBA will be approved by both sides. I'm betting on b.